Implementing and managing innovation
The Professional Practice course culminates in a course plan and associated materials
for implementation in a specific context. This means that it is a proposal for change,
and so needs to be understood within the context of other educational changes.
In this session we will introduce Systems Theory as a way of understanding
educational institutions and individual agency within them. We will consider the
complexities of introducing new plans and frameworks into educational institutions,
and examine some factors which may help lead to success.
Key References
Clarke M 2003 Introduction to A place to stand. Michigan University Press
Hall, D. & Hewings, A. (eds) 2001. Introduction to Innovation in English Language
Teaching: a reader. London: Routledge.
Graves, K. 2008. The language curriculum: a social contextual perspective. Language
Teaching 41/2: 147-181
Waters, A. 2009. Managing innovation in English language education. Language
Teaching 42/4: 421-458
Wedell, M. 2009. Planning for educational change: putting people and their contexts
first. London: Continuum.
Teachers and Course Design
What are some of the reasons why class teachers are particularly good people to be
involved in course and materials design? Consider potential advantages to:
- Teachers themselves
- Learners
- Schools
- Anyone else?
Teachers as agents of change?
“The teacher is the person with the most powerful role in the classroom. The initial
structuring of learning communities depends on the teacher’s using her agency to
change the relationships and roles in the classroom. To do so, teachers may face an
array of obstacles. She may face resistance from learners (and parents) who expect her
to provide answers and guide them to success on exams. There may be a lack of
support by fellow teachers and other administrators. There may be pressure to adhere
to methods and materials. … (Graves 2008: 171)
1
Rogers 2003: Change adopter categories
Innovators
Early Adopters
Early Majority
Late Majority
Laggards
Each group can be seen as categorised by a certain psychological disposition towards
innovation:
Innovators: Venturesome, (ie those who are characteristically pro-innovation in their
orientation)
Early adopters: Respect, (ie those who are regarded by others as being sound judges
of the value of potential innovations)
Early Majority: Deliberateness, (ie those who have a tendency to adopt a ‘wait and
see’ approach to innovation adoption)
Late Majority: Scepticism, (ie those who tend to adopt a critical attitude to the value
of potential innovations)
Laggards: Tradition, (ie those who have a preference for the status (ante) quo).
(Rogers 2003: 282-285 as discussed in Waters 2009: 438).
How course and materials innovations succeed and fail: ‘Math
attack’ case study
This activity, taken from Clarke 2003 (86-91) is intended to help us think about what
makes an educational change such as a course innovation more likely to succeed or
fail:
2
Innovation characteristics likely to enhance or reduce the possibility
of adoption:
Relative advantage: the degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the
idea it supersedes…
Compatibility: the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent
with the existing values, past experiences and needs of potential adopters…
Complexity: the degree to which an innovation is perceived as difficult to
understand and use…
Trialability: the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a
limited basis….
Observability: the degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to others.
(Rogers 2003: 15-16, discussed in Waters 2009: 426).
3
Educational cultures in which teachers work
Consider the following diagram from Wedell 2009:33 regarding possible
characteristics of educational cultures. How would you characterise the culture in
which you yourself work?
Transmission based
Interpretation based
Knowledge is clearly
defined and there is one
right answer to almost any
question
What knowledge is
The purpose of education
is to learn knowledge
The purpose of education
---------
Knowledge is dynamic and
is arrived at through
discussion
The purpose of education
is to learn how to learn
---------
Learners are members of a
group and speak only
when spoken to
Teachers are the initiators
of classroom activity and
should know all the
answers
Learners
---------
Teachers
---------
Learners are a collection
of individuals who are
expected to express
themselves
Teachers are there to
support learners’
participation in the
learning process and can
admit ignorance
Is this table useful for describing the educational context in which you work? What
are the implications of your educational culture for the role of a teacher as course and
materials designer or the teacher as a change agent?
4
Systems theory: a framework for making sense of change
What is meant by systems theory?
“Systems are all living organisms and stable groups of living organisms, from single
cell organisms to plants and animals. The individual human being is the system we
are most interested in, along with families, classrooms, schools and communities,
which are also systems. Systems are assemblages of parts that function as a whole.
They can be characterized as goal seeking, or self organising; that is, they seem to
function with an identifiable purpose. At the same time, they are open to information
from their environments. In part because of this tension between internal and external
control, their behaviour is not strictly predictable. It is patterned, however, and if we
observer systems over a period of time we will notice that they exhibit behaviours that
permit us to guess with a high probability of success what is going to happen next.”
(Clarke 2003: 15).
Clarke’s six principles for understanding change within systems:
(2003 ch1)
Systems have no purpose
We cannot control systems
Systems function in cycles
Systems function in response to internal and external information
Systems cannot be understood independently of their contexts
Open systems require a budget of flexibility
Clarke’s very brief summary of systems theory: (2007 ch10)
Systems function towards stability
Systems function in response to internal and external messages
Systems respond to disturbances in ways that, if not precisely predictable, are still
expectable
Systems cannot be changed unilaterally
The world consists of systems within systems within systems
5
What are the interrelating subsystems in which your innovation will
have to operate?
Diagram from Kennedy 1988 in Waters 2009:
Cultural
Political
Administrative
Educational
Institutional
Classroom
Innovation
Graves 2008: A social contextual perspective on the language
curriculum
Course development is a set of processes – design, revision, enactment, evaluation…
Enactment as distinct from implementation
6
Enactment perspective – focuses attention on specific materials, classrooms, people.
Enactment is not only influenced by a syllabus plan, also by a number of other factors
such as:
Context (physical, political, cultural, etc).
‘Macro’ example: TL embedded, or removed;
‘Micro’ example: resource constraints
Individuals
Communities
Institutional relationships
“Successful curriculum planning, enactment and evaluation processes depend on
collaboration and mutual responsiveness among participants. All of the examples
cited in this review involved, indeed depended on, some form of collaboration
between administrators and curriculum planners or teachers and curriculum planners
or teachers and learners or teachers and teacher educators” ((2008: 175-176).
Reading
Burns, Anne. (2003), ESL curriculum development in Australia: recent trends and
debates. RELC Journal 34, 3 261-283.
Carless, D. 2001. A case study of curriculum implementation in Hong Kong. In Hall,
D. & Hewings, A. Innovation in English language teaching: a reader. London:
Routledge.
Clarke M 2003 A place to stand. Michigan University Press
Clarke M 2007. Common ground, contested territory. Michigan University Press.
Fang, Xu and Warschauer, Mark (2004), Technology and curricular reform in China:
a case study. TESOL Quarterly, 38, 2 301 – 323.
Hall, D. & Hewings, A. (eds) 2001. Innovation in English Language Teaching: a
reader. London: Routledge.
Jennings K & Doyle T 1996 Curriculum innovation, teamwork and the management
of change. In Willis J & Willis D (eds) Challenge and change in language teaching.
London: Heinemann
Lin, Benedict (2003), English in Singapore: an insider’s perspective of syllabus
renewal through a genre-based approach. RELC Journal 34, 2 223-246.
7
Markee N 1997 Managing curricular innovation. Cambridge CUP
Markee N 2001. The diffusion of innovation in Language Teaching. In Hall, D. & A.
Hewings (eds) 2001: Innovation in English Language Teaching: a reader. London:
Routledge.
Ozdeniz D 1996 Introducing innovations into your teaching. In Willis J & Willis D
(eds) Challenge and change in language teaching. London: Heinemann
Quirke P 2000 Hearing voices: a robust and flexible framework for gathering and
using student feedback. In Edge J (ed) Action Research: case studies in TESOL
practice. Alexandria VA. TESOL.
Rogers, E.M. 2003. Diffusions of innovations 5th edition. New York: Free Press.
Waters, A. & Vilches, M. (2008). Factors affecting ELT reforms: the case of the
Philippines Basic Education Curriculum. RELC Journal 39/1: 5-24
Waters, A. 2009. Managing innovation in English language education. Language
Teaching 42/4: 421-458
Wedell, M. 2009. Planning for educational change: putting people and their contexts
first. London: Continuum.
8